THE OHIO VALLEY-GREAT LAKES ETHNOHISTORY
ARCHIVES: THE MIAMI COLLECTION
It is noted that the following work from the Miami Archives should be read and
considered within the historical context in which it was composed and printed.
The opinions expressed and the language used do not reflect the opinions or
standards of the Glenn A. Black Laboratory of Archaeology, but are, rather,
indicative of thought in that historical moment during which the document was
published.
Rouille to Mirepoix
(February 19, 1755)
Rouille, Antoine Louis, Comte
de Jouy in: Pease, French
Series, vol. II, 1936,
pp. 116-125.
The English appear to base all their recent claims in North America principally on Article 15 of the Treaty of Utrecht, which stipulates, "that the French subjects inhabitants of Canada and others shall disturb or molest in no wise the Five Nations or Indian cantons, which are under the dominion of Great Britain, nor the other American natives who are her allies; that the subjects of Great Britain shall similarly live in peace with the Ameri- (page 123) can natives who are subjects or allies of France; and that the subject of either crown shall have a full liberty to go and come among these tribes to ply their trade.
There are, Monsieur, several important observations to make as to this stipulation of the Treaty of Utrecht.
The enumeration of Indian tribes who are subject to the domination of either of the two crowns is neither exact nor well founded, and cannot change the nature of things. The American tribes have preserved their liberty and their independence. It is a constant truth not only with the Iroquois tribes but also with all the other tribes who are close enough to resort to them. Everyone knows that England has neither governor nor magistrate there; and it is certain that if any Englishman claimed to exercise any authority over this people, the commission with which his court equipped him would not guarantee his life against the danger with which they would threaten it.
It was also agreed in Article 15 of the Treaty of Utrecht "that commissaries named on both sides should specify exactly and distinctly which peoples were or ought to be held subjects or friends of Great Britain, and which of France."
This stipulation has never been executed and it could not be. Two reasons render its execution absolutely impossible.
The first is that these tribes are independent, and that neither the French nor the English would dare contest their liberty; one of these tribes today is friendly to one of the two crowns; tomorrow it will be an enemy of that same crown. As a result the register that would be drawn up would have no consistency nor permanent stability.
The second reason is that the territory of these tribes is as uncertain as their alliance. These peoples have scarcely any idea of property. For them there is no territory save that which they occupy at the present moment. They often change their dwelling place and the Iroquois tribes are themselves a terrible and re- (page 125) markable example. In the time of M. de Champlain, governor of Canada, they chiefly inhabited the shores of the lake to which the name of that governor has been given; since that time they have abandoned that country to seat themselves elsewhere. Nothing from day to day prevents them from going to occupy a new territory, and such transmigrations are frequent. It would therefore be impossible to fix a district and boundaries for tribes which have never known them and which do not wish to know them.
Return
to TOC, p. 13
Continue
to next part of Miami Collection
[return to Miami
Collection Menu]
[return to Glenn A. Black
Laboratory of Archaeology List of Publications]
[return to Glenn A. Black
Laboratory of Archaeology Home]
Last updated: 07
December 2000
URL: http://www.gbl.indiana.edu/home.html
Comments: webmaster@www.gbl.indiana.edu
Copyright 1996, Glenn Black Laboratory of Archaeology and The Trustees of Indiana University